*Unofficial* New Zealand Black Caps Thread

[TheJediBrah]

will elaborate when im home. will also point out for those who can't read (the lil aussie) the original point was 'injury prevented cairns from being an atvg'

1. that's not what you said
2. still not even true

 

[Athlai]

This is worse than my opinion on Southee.

 

[Bahnz]

he'd easily be a top 10 quick during his peak as well. mcgrath, pollock, donald, young gillespie, shoaib...starting to run out of names.

Walsh and Ambrose were still playing through most of Cairns peak, and were both better than him. Wasim and too. Then you have guys like Darren Gough and Andy Caddick who were on Cairns level if not slightly ahead of him.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Walsh and Ambrose were still playing through most of Cairns peak, and were both better than him. Wasim and too. Then you have guys like Darren Gough and Andy Caddick who were on Cairns level if not slightly ahead of him.

I would definitely have Cairns ahead of Gough and Caddick

Then again I genuinely believe a fully fit Dean Headley was better than anyone else England had at the time so what do I know

 

[Flem274*]

cairns entered tests way too early as a 19 year old, similar to the treatment of other atvgs. from 96-04 cairns took 175 @ 27 with the ball (and averaged 36 with the bat) across 48 tests. between 98-04, he took 136 @ 26 from 34 tests (and averaged 37 with the bat).

this is pretty similar if not better than trenty and basically the definition of atvg numbers going on when we started hearing other unnamed bowlers were atgs. i think it is more than fair to say if not prevented by injury and new zealands modest schedule compared to other nations, cairns would be widely regarded as an atvg on bowling alone.

he spent 6-8 years as a high class test bowler alone. this isn't a little peak like southee's where he faded away just as we got comfortable the new version, the alleged mr x is undeniably a woeful human for his treatment of vincent but the **** could seriously bowl.

Then you have guys like Darren Gough and Andy Caddick who were on Cairns level if not slightly ahead of him.

not a chance

This is worse than my opinion on Southee.

nice try

1. that's not what you said
2. still not even true

you would get credit for this if you led with it

 

[Flem274*]

I definitely don’t remember Cairns swinging the ball much, if at all. That 1999 series with an out of control duke might have been an exception.

imagine if he got to bowl with a duke at home tho

 

[Bahnz]

cairns entered tests way too early as a 19 year old, similar to the treatment of other atvgs. from 96-04 cairns took 175 @ 27 with the ball (and averaged 36 with the bat) across 48 tests. between 98-04, he took 136 @ 26 from 34 tests (and averaged 37 with the bat).

this is pretty similar if not better than trenty and basically the definition of atvg numbers going on when we started hearing other unnamed bowlers were atgs. i think it is more than fair to say if not prevented by injury and new zealands modest schedule compared to other nations, cairns would be widely regarded as an atvg on bowling alone.

he spent 6-8 years as a high class test bowler alone. this isn't a little peak like southee's where he faded away just as we got comfortable the new version, the alleged mr x is undeniably a woeful human for his treatment of vincent but the **** could seriously bowl.

I won't bother about arguing whether or not Cairns meets the definition of an atvg, because there is no such definition, it's a nonsense term made up by our fellow dickheads on CW. But as for the question of Cairns v Boult, that's a pretty easy one to actually answer. Boult averages sub-30 v every team he's played against save Australia and SA. Cairns averages over 30 against every team he played save SL, WI and Zimbabwe. Cairns' bowling stats are really boosted by lots of cheap wickets against some pretty feeble Zim sides and arguably the worst team in test history (the 02 touring Bangladeshis) - Cairns picked up nearly a quarter of his career wickets against these 2 sides. Admittedly Boult's played a few tests against Zim and Bangladesh through his career, but modern day Bangladesh are clearly a better side than the Zimbabwe of the 90's and in any case, they make up a much smaller portion of his career tally.

Boult's record is comparable to Cairns in Australia, and better in England, New Zealand, Sri Lanka and UAE/Pakistan. Cairns has a better average in India and Zimbabwe. Another defense I guess is that Cairns debuted too young and that this poisons his figures. But Cairns played only 5 tests during the first 3 years of his international career, and when removed they don't dramatically change the picture. Cairns record in Australia becomes slightly (but not significantly) better than Boult's in Australia, but otherwise the story is the same. Cairns was good, Boult is better, and that's about all there is to it.

As for the curious little dig at Southee, even with his occasional dips in form, over the last 8 years Southee's taken 242 wickets at 26.26, slightly better than Cairns' own 'peak' average.

 

[Bahnz]

Also, Caddick was probably only on par with Cairns, but Gough I think was quite clearly a better bowler. You only have to look at who they played their cricket against to see how misleading their similar career averages are. Gough played nearly a third of his tests against Australia, and did bloody well against them. He did bloody well against everyone save SA in fact. And in case you're tempted to make the 'Duke Ball' argument, Gough actually did better away than at home. The bloke averaged 27 in Australia.

 

[Flem274*]

well rip

will probably delve tomorrow to check whether you're being even more selective than a pom filtering out kookaburra stats or if i have strong memory bias towards my childhood memories of peak cairns and the recent series highlights i've seen, because you've basically painted him as fortunate to average less than 40 with the ball there tbh and i don't think someone that bad would get the press they do even from notoriously derisive (towards 90s kiwis) overseas media.

a hole i can easily poke is modern bangers aren't better than andy flower and heath streak zimbabwe, especially away from home. 90s windies were a real team as well.

ftr the southee example was intellectually honest - i needed a kiwi peak surrounded by mediocrity or less peakyness. boult and wagner have been too consistent and cairns teammates stayed on the park even less than he did.

 

[GoodAreasShane]

Gough had some good moments against Australia but he also had some absolute shockers, all in all his record is decent but to say he did "bloody well" is a bit of a stretch imo

Everyone remembers him carrying on like a **** in the 1998 MCG victory, but he really didn't bowl that well at all that innings. Headley was the man who really got the job done on that occasion. But then Gough gets on and cleans up those noted world class batsman Stuart MacGill and Glenn McGrath, and that is what people remember unfortunately

 

[Bahnz]

well rip

will probably delve tomorrow to check whether you're being even more selective than a pom filtering out kookaburra stats or if i have strong memory bias towards my childhood memories of peak cairns and the recent series highlights i've seen, because you've basically painted him as fortunate to average less than 40 with the ball there tbh and i don't think someone that bad would get the press they do even from notoriously derisive (towards 90s kiwis) overseas media.

a hole i can easily poke is modern bangers aren't better than andy flower and heath streak zimbabwe, especially away from home. 90s windies were a real team as well.

ftr the southee example was intellectually honest - i needed a kiwi peak surrounded by mediocrity or less peakyness. boult and wagner have been too consistent and cairns teammates stayed on the park even less than he did.

I don't think he was fortunate to have an average less than 40, I mean he was a good bowler and especially before his 2nd major knee injury in 2000. You're probably right that if his body hadn't given out then he would've been able to push on to a much better overall record. But the very large amount of cricket that we played v Zim around the turn of the millenium definitely benefitted his career record by a good 2 or 3 runs (and you could say he maybe deserved that given he was thrown in the deep end at 19).

Flower and arguably streak are better than anybody who's ever played for Bangladesh, but you've got to remember that Zim in the 90's had some real club-standard cricketers filling in the blanks in their lineup (a consequence of your player pool being barely 30,000 I guess). Zim managed just 2 wins between 96 and 2004 (Cairns' peak) against anybody save Bangladesh (1 apiece v India and Pakistan). I think on average modern Bangladesh are a better side, even when touring.

 

[Flem274*]

im surprising myself in actually fact checking you, mostly because my statsguru tab was still open.

during the 96-04 peak i left open, cairns bowling includes

33 @ 35 v aus (23 @ 34 in aus) this isn't good but will be used in a later point.
36 @ 27 v eng (21 @ 23 in eng with the cheat ball)
17 @ 9 (looooooooooool) v the last proper windies side before this decade

these are also decent sample sizes. boult in a more complete career faced australia less than cairns did just in that 8 year peak.

some real clangers v india and pakistan and then 3 'fine' tests against sa where he averaged 32. his record supports a compromise between our positions imo. boult is a little better, but boult also has far bigger holes. their australian records are in no way comparable at all. lovely trenty averages 41 against aus, and it would be worse if his hand didn't get busted by starc. boult is also woeful in india (though i remember him bowling better than his figures) and south africa, but has some good hopelessly flat deck wickets in the uae.

having seen both, cairns' best is better than boult's best, and boult really impressed me in the uae. boult has had a more complete career and barring disaster (always around the corner with kiwi bowlers) will be an atvg. peak cairns tho is a new level. i wish the current team had his aura and fire in the soul. we've got wagner, but he could use a friend.

I don't think he was fortunate to have an average less than 40, I mean he was a good bowler and especially before his 2nd major knee injury in 2000. You're probably right that if his body hadn't given out then he might've been able to push on to a much better overall record. But the very large amount of cricket that we played v Zim around the turn of the millenium definitely benefitted his career record by a good 2 or 3 runs.

Flower and arguably streak are better than anybody who's ever played for Bangladesh, but you've got to remember that Zim in the 90's had some real club-standard cricketers filling in the gaps in their lineup (a consequence of your player pool being barely 30,000 I guess). Zim managed just 2 wins between 96 and 2004 (Cairns' peak) against anybody save Bangladesh (1 apiece v India and Pakistan). Modern

modern bangers have the same issue. their pace attack is hawke cup level.

 

[the big bambino]

Gough had some good moments against Australia but he also had some absolute shockers, all in all his record is decent but to say he did "bloody well" is a bit of a stretch imo

Everyone remembers him carrying on like a **** in the 1998 MCG victory, but he really didn't bowl that well at all that innings. Headley was the man who really got the job done on that occasion. But then Gough gets on and cleans up those noted world class batsman Stuart MacGill and Glenn McGrath, and that is what people remember unfortunately

I agree re Headley but he was injury prone. Ironically this perhaps helps his overall record because he was always bowling at the peak of his form. Could he have sustained it like Gough had to? Not so sure about that. Gough was always a danger and he played against arguably the best ever Australian batting line up. His average multiplied by the degree of difficulty makes him considerably better than Cairns. cairns beats Caddick though.

 

[Bahnz]

im surprising myself in actually fact checking you, mostly because my statsguru tab was still open.

during the 96-04 peak i left open, cairns bowling includes

33 @ 35 v aus (23 @ 34 in aus) this isn't good but will be used in a later point.
36 @ 27 v eng (21 @ 23 in eng with the cheat ball)
17 @ 9 (looooooooooool) v the last proper windies side before this decade

these are also decent sample sizes. boult in a more complete career faced australia less than cairns did just in that 8 year peak.

some real clangers v india and pakistan and then 3 'fine' tests against sa where he averaged 32. his record supports a compromise between our positions imo. boult is a little better, but boult also has far bigger holes. their australian records are in no way comparable at all. lovely trenty averages 41 against aus, and it would be worse if his hand didn't get busted by starc. boult is also woeful in india (though i remember him bowling better than his figures) and south africa, but has some good hopelessly flat deck wickets in the uae.

having seen both, cairns' best is better than boult's best, and boult really impressed me in the uae. boult has had a more complete career and barring disaster (always around the corner with kiwi bowlers) will be an atvg. peak cairns tho is a new level. i wish the current team had his aura and fire in the soul. we've got wagner, but he could use a friend.

modern bangers have the same issue. their pace attack is hawke cup level.

You've got to remember that "the last proper Windies side" had already been hung drawn and quartered by SA 5-0 the previous summer. They weren't the rabble they became in subsequent years (if only because of Walsh and Lara) but they weren't a good team anymore. But tbf, Cairns' bowling was awesome that series, as it had been earlier in the year v England. I think 1999 was when Cairns really peaked as a bowler.

You also have a fair point on Boult's record v Australia, but a part of me just can't help but put that down to bad luck (at least in part). Boult played 5 of his 7 tests v Aus coming off a serious stress fracture that had him bowling barely as quick as Lord Colin in 2015/16. Then when his next series v Aus roles around 5 years later, he's injured again. I struggle to reconcile how excellent Boult's bowling is (especially at home) against teams like India and England with how miserably he's done against Aus, and I can't help but think a part of is due to just plain bad timing - that and Australia playing so little test cricket in New Zealand in the modern era (seriously, 4 tests in the past 14 years with none scheduled until 2024 at the earliest?).

One last thing I'll say that clearly separates Boult from Cairns - Boult didn't **** around for the first third of his career. At the same age that Cairns was still busy screaming "YOU'RE NOT MY REAL DAD!" at Glenn Turner, Boult had already been the finished product for several years and was leading NZ to the WC Final.

 

[Magrat Garlick]

asif there is one thing about cairns y'all are studiously not mentioning

 

[TheJediBrah]

I would definitely have Cairns ahead of Gough and Caddick

Then again I genuinely believe a fully fit Dean Headley was better than anyone else England had at the time so what do I know

Very questionable

You also have a fair point on Boult's record v Australia, but a part of me just can't help but put that down to bad luck (at least in part). Boult played 5 of his 7 tests v Aus coming off a serious stress fracture that had him bowling barely as quick as Lord Colin in 2015/16. Then when his next series v Aus roles around 5 years later, he's injured again.

lol there's this again

More so they were just absolute roads. These were the Ross Taylor 290 wickets.

 

[Flem274*]

brisbane and adelaide weren't roads. nz had a big issue with boult and southee bowling medium pace both sides of the pitch. i almost smashed my tv during the brisbane test, what they sent down would have been smashed in the hawke cup. at least kane sent johnson into retirement.

the intelligent answer to bahnz question is boult just isn't set up to succeed in aus imo. it's an unforgiving place for skiddy swing bowlers with sharp but not express pace. if the ball isn't moving they tend to come onto the bat nicely. it can be done (anderson 2011) but it is very challenging.

the real tim southee is a better horse for the course. tall fast medium hitting the deck hard with excellent use of the crease and his off cutter provides him with a lot more options than boult in australia, but his tendency to trundle in at medium pace bowling along the wicket has held him back from being the superior bowler to trent boult.

boult has found ways to adapt to asia by using reverse or just bowling into the deck at pace to get it above the infamous subcontinent hip, but that's not going to work in aus where they don't mind a bit of bounce.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

It wasn't just Cairns who was injured a lot in the 90s. Cairns, Doull, Nash, O'Connor was potentially a really good quartet but were injured half the time. As well as his 7-fer vs India at the Basin I remember Doull bowling us to an away test win in Pakistan.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

And that would've been a pretty average team (and no suspicion about the result). A very young Nash got on the board at Lords in 94 too.

 

[Fuller Pilch]

1st test Nov 96 - bowling attack of Cairns, Doull, Vaughan, Patel, Harris!